Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


So who would claim a £1 donation on expenses?

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 15 January 2009
A POLITICIAN has had an expense claim rejected by the Scottish Parliament – after trying to claw back a £1 charity donation.
Bill Butler, the Labour MSP for Glasgow Anniesland and a former candidate for deputy leader, listed the £1 claim as a "carer fund donation".

It was just one of £1000 worth of claims from MSPs rejected since May 2007 by the Scottish Parliament authorities.

According to Mr Butler, the claim was an oversight. He said: "This was an item on a hotel bill, which was put there without my knowledge and as soon as it was drawn to my attention, it (the claim] was withdrawn."

It is standard practice for hotels to ask customers in advance if they wish to take part in charity donations scheme.

However, a spokesman for Mr Butler said last night that the MSP was not asked by the hotel if he wanted to donate to charity.
Bill Butler
Bill Butler


The spokesman was unable to provide details of where and when the incident occurred other than it was at "a hotel in Scotland at some point during the last financial year".

The list of rejected claims included attempts to claw back money for Christmas cards, plants and satellite navigation kits. Another senior Labour MSP, Malcolm Chisholm, tried and failed to get £3 back for a charge on a pay-as-you-go smart card.

He said: "I must have paid for something with a card and claimed the transaction cost as well as the substance of the purchase. If I had paid for it with cash, it wouldn't have arisen."

The largest recorded rejected claim was from David Whitton, Labour's finance spokesman, who wanted £290 in expenses for printing Christmas cards.

Even Alex Fergusson, the Presiding Officer, has been rebuffed, attempting to recover the £132.78 cost of a "congratulatory advert" for a constituency charity for disadvantaged children.

Jim Mather, the enterprise minister, tried to claim an undisclosed amount for breakdown recovery. His bids to get £28.91 back for Christmas cards and £9.05 for freight costs were also thrown out. The SNP's Michael Matheson wanted £44.45 for plants and plant pots for an office, while the SNP's Stuart McMillan was also refused £225.60 for a Christmas advert.

An unnamed MSP tried to claim back money for a sat-nav device.

Critics say the claims are just more evidence of politicians attempting to have their lives subsidised by taxpayers. The issue has echoes of Westminster's "John Lewis list", whereby MPs were able to claim for kitchens and TVs. But some MSPs point out that, in Scotland, these minor claims were rejected whereas the John Lewis list was paid for by taxpayers.

Mark Wallace, of the Taxpayers' Alliance, said: "It's amazing that after all the controversy in recent months, some politicians still seem to be trying to get away with claiming for such spurious items. Taxpayers are struggling in the recession, so it's right all these items were rejected."

Pints of milk, taxi fares, offices – all worth a try

MSPs have been no strangers to controversy over expenses in the ten years since the Scottish Parliament was reconvened.

The most high-profile resignation was that of the former Labour First Minister Henry McLeish.

He quit in 2001 after it emerged he had sub-let part of his Westminster office, which was subsidised by taxpayers, while still an MP.

A failure to declare leadership campaign expenses also ultimately led to the resignation of a more recent Labour leader, Wendy Alexander.

The former Liberal Democrat MSP Keith Raffan ran into trouble when he claimed more than £40,000 for travelling expenses. He resigned as an MSP in 2004, citing health reasons, although many believed it was because of the furore over the claim.

David McLetchie resigned as Tory leader in Holyrood over expenses claims relating to taxi fares.

Former Conservative MSP Brian Monteith, who tried to use the taxi claim issue to bring down Mr McLetchie, also had to pay back £250 worth of taxi claims he should not have made.

Some have got away with strange claims. In 2007 Lib Dem MSP Jamie Stone was able to get 42p back for a pint of milk.




Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 15 January 2009 1:14 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Labour Party
 
1

Rufus-T-Firefly,

14/01/2009 22:26:32
What a bunch of money grabbers.

Do they not earn enough?

The sooner Holyrood is closed down and turned into an Amusement Park the better.
2

Rufus-T-Firefly,

14/01/2009 22:32:57
"SNP MSP Michael Matheson wanted £44.45 back for plants and plant pots for an office."

Good to see he had some time for this. Trying to get the Hokey Cokey banned must have taken up the rump of his time.
3

,

15/01/2009 00:04:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
4

,

15/01/2009 00:08:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
5

Rufus-T-Firefly,

15/01/2009 00:11:27
Secret Agent jimmy Le Pie, if thats your idea of ridicule and humiliation then I am somewhat suprised.

All he posted was disgusting filth.

Each to their own.
6

Dark Lochnagar,

Symington 15/01/2009 00:12:39
Nulabour the Nuparty of sleaze. £1 for a charity donation. He should resign immediately. How he can walk the streets is beyond me. I hope his constituents sort him out at the next election. Whatever next, mugging grannies for their pension money. He won't want the hokeycokey banned. He'll be able to rob their pockets when they stick their leg in! Resign Sir. You are a disgrace.
7

Wisnaeme,

15/01/2009 00:15:55
Ah isn't it luvely when we're allowed to read about Scottish politicos and their perceived trying it on fandangos in the Scottish parliament.

Ah mean to say, so transparent and honest.


Uh Huh, right enough; Westmidden it ain't.

Can you just imagine the 'Hootsmon' being allowed to publish all of Westmidden's fandango expenses?

Uh Huh, the 'Hootsmon' would have terrible trouble obtaining enough paper and ink to fulfil that task.

.
8

,

15/01/2009 00:21:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
9

Fifi la Bonbon,

15/01/2009 00:21:37
This story just shows how politicians of the party I support are hugely morally superior to politicians from the parties different to the party I support. It proves conclusively, for those doubters who might still need the evidence, not only that the politicians in the party I support are better than the others in rhetoric, integrity and personal hygiene, but that the ideas which my political party espouses are infinitely better than those espoused by all the others.
10

,

15/01/2009 00:21:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
11

,

15/01/2009 00:22:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

Jimmy Le Pie,

15/01/2009 00:30:34
Funny whenever the Butchers Apron brigade lose the arguments (and the plot) they resort to ruining these threads.

Like the discredited union, they are pathetic
13

,

15/01/2009 00:33:16
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
14

UK007,

15/01/2009 00:34:23
#1/#2 RTF - Well written, you showed #3 that your are not thick ???
15

,

15/01/2009 00:35:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
16

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 15/01/2009 00:59:49
Roll on Referendum Day on INDEPENDENCE. The result will be that SCOTLAND will be attending the Olympic Games in 2012 as an Independent country in her own right. On the other hand england will not be there it will be part of something called gb!!! Or could that be The Gordon Brown Factor??????????????????????
17

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 15/01/2009 01:06:02
I just knew it would be a Labour MSP. But you must admit, he was thinking of us when he made the donation on our behalf.
18

FerryPort,

15/01/2009 01:09:46
boycott israeli goods, that includes disney, McDonalds, coca-cola, M&S, ............... there are many more
19

Newton_Invented_Gravity,

15/01/2009 02:13:51
'The sooner Holyrood is closed down and turned into an Amusement Park the better.'

yes, because of course politicians at Westminster never engage in this sort of thing do they?
20

British Military Vet Veritas,

Gaza City 15/01/2009 04:27:43
If this politico is uncareful, he will be getting Scots a reputation for being too canny and mean.

.
Perish the thought.
21

donald,

glasgow 15/01/2009 05:21:31
He could claim expenses for being a Broon Butler.
22

Billiam Wallace,

15/01/2009 05:37:06
His explanation seems reasonable, though it greaves me not to find fault when it comes to members of the NuLiebour North British Sleaze and Corruption Party.
Makes a change for them only claiming a pound, they're more usually to be found claiming thousands in air fares and such like to go to that big gentleman's club at Westmonster where they get cheap food and drink and cheap accomodation in one of the most expensive cities in the world all at OUR expense AND they get paid too AND they do sweet FA in many cases. Nice work if you can get it.
23

Angleland Isover,

15/01/2009 06:30:04
They should all be unemployed and claiming benefit not expenses.
24

drunken proffet,

Tassy 15/01/2009 07:06:59
Total amateurs. I remember in the good old days before they built the road bridge the local councils tried to organise a round the world trip for certain members to study box girder construction. Aye and they were all bridge builders by profession. It is good to know that some of their more enthusiastic ideas are still getting shot down in flames.
25

Mad Jock,

Offshore Denmark 15/01/2009 07:14:47
It certainly seems that this was a genuine oversight, and the man should not be castigated for it. However, he should be hanging his head in shame over the fact that his idea of a charitable donation was only a quid. What a mean git!
26

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 07:14:58
2
Aye, it's great to see my local MSP spending his time trying to steal plants from the public purse and stop terrible bigotry at football matches. The strange thing is that he is mysteriously silent over those lovable rogues at Scotland matches singing 'stand up if you hate England'....that's not bigotry, oh no, that's banter, don't you know!
27

One-man-bucket's older twin,

15/01/2009 07:21:39
£1000 is peanuts. I think the story here is that they were only able to identify £1000 worth of false claims.
28

fair scunnered,

edinburgh 15/01/2009 07:29:36
my my Ebeneezer Scrooge is alive and well,who else would claim a quid as "carer fund donation".what career?,as a penny pinching scrooge?,BAH HUMBUG!,xmas is gone
funny how they can find £9 billion for heathrow expansion,yet £2 billion is out of reach for scotland?,so people will be asking "what the dickens is going on"?,westminster is "Oliver Twist" always wanting more of scotlands wealth
whilst holyrood is either "Christmas Carol",with its labourite scrooge trainee,or "great expectations"(we expect but westminsters answer is broon says naw)
29

fair scunnered,

edinburgh 15/01/2009 07:32:54
lard haw haw foulkes was last night to be heard sobbing as,even he never thought to claim all his £1 hes spent on cups of tea,or entry into tynecastle,aye ye missed that one ya big galoot
30

tooch,

Edinburgh 15/01/2009 07:39:53
Glad this was caught. I wish i was the one to scrutinise all MP's expenses. I would go over them with a fine tooth comb - more than once - lol
31

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 07:39:55
31
So it's all England's fault is it? You must have been so proud at your fellow Braveheart striking a blow for Scottish freedom by punching that wee lassie with the English accent, eh?
32

fair scunnered,

edinburgh 15/01/2009 07:47:48
#34 london gets billions in non counted revenues,which we all know about,as for that @rsewipe in aberdeen he needs a public flogging,what about all the abuse scots get in england?,all the stereotyping from the bbc,ie we need a drunk/loony/weirdo,they always seem to cast a scot
to claim a pound as expenses is beyond a joke,thats how harry lauder made a name for himself,protaying scots as tightfisted,mean etc,yet he got a knighthood and the last labour council named a road after him
any man who lifts his hands to a woman,should get at least 10 years with no parole
33

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 07:52:49
35
It's disappointing that you fail to see the correlation between your and other nationalist anti-English rants and violent attacks on English people.
34

steve 1511,

aberdeen 15/01/2009 07:54:17
their little trotters can not carry them to the trough quick enough
35

fair scunnered,

edinburgh 15/01/2009 08:01:48
#36
i am only pointing out that england gets a lot more than scotland gets,if we are supposed to be an united kingdom,with everyone equal,how come all revenue isnt split 4 ways,last strike at grangemouth,was quoted by hm treasury ,as costing a loss of £50 million a day and of which £25 million was lost to hm treasury
one plant at grangemouth,scotland only has 2 ,the rest are in england,
untill we rid society of idiots like the one in aberdeen,we will always be getting this
considering scotland never voted for the act of union,naw scottish lords bought off with english gold
st giles bells rang out on the day webecame part of the uk"why do i weep on this my wedding day"
had joe public had the vote back them ,scotland would have rejected englands advance
i find it absolutely disgusting that fellow scots attack other scots for having free speech,scotland has always grabbed defeat from the jaws of victory
36

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 08:13:59
38
I think you have a fairly jaundiced view of our history that isn't particularly accurate, for example there is simply no way of knowing what 'Joe Public' actually thought in 1707. I know there are contemporary reports of unrest but it wasn't a popular uprising by any menas.
Your assertion that England gets a 'lot more' than Scotland doesn't really bear scrutiny either and this false claim only fans the flames of bigotry and resentment.
Free speech is a fundamental tenet of a modern civilised country. It has to be used wisely however and if your words give succour and comfort to those who would hurt others then perhaps it is best that you think before you exercise that right.
37

Gussie Fink-Nottle,

15/01/2009 08:16:31
#29 Stand up if you hate Grahamski. Ach weel, at least reach for your mouse instead.

I'm dismayed that Labour haven't tried to spin this as an attack on the Scottish Government. Butler should have said, "Horrified at the extent of cuts Glasgow City Council has made in its donations to charity I was trying to redress the imbalance, by having the Scottish 'Executive' pay this."
38

Marcus Fenix,

Renfrew 15/01/2009 08:18:15
That really was low, even for a Labour man that was low. He should be ashamed of himself.

SCROOGE!
39

mr angry,

ayrshire 15/01/2009 08:31:43
41#. I agree, Grahamski is a dumpling extrodinaire. Yet to see it post anything sensible.
40

11+failed,

the pans 15/01/2009 08:33:08
Nice when your hotel bills are being claimed from the public purse, you don't need to bother checking the bill.
41

kpm,

unsworth 15/01/2009 08:34:28
Politicion, second hand car dealer,estate Agent,Sleaze whats in a name ?
42

tog,

Edinburgh 15/01/2009 08:43:01
Whatever criticisms we have of the MSPs the system to monitor expenses seems very robust. Not only do you get refused dubious claims but you also get exposed to public ridicule. Raises the question though just how stupid do you have to be to make some of the above claims knowing you are not only unlikely to get the money but it is likey to be in the paper. Clearly some MSPs are still operating on the policy of claim everything you think you can get away with
43

David MacVicar,

web 15/01/2009 08:45:37
Todays top political story brought to you by the North British Andrex company. This just 'had' to be a MADdox article.

Headline: FOI shows some MSPs expense claims were duly rejected. 42p paid to MSP in 'milky milky' expense claim shocker!

What an exclusive! Where do I sign up for a subscription? I can't wait for tomorrows Salmond takes car again instead of walking headline, between the Labour press releases.

Anything major they were actually paid for that they should not? Expenses of mass destruction?
44

watcher,

Edinburgh 15/01/2009 08:46:52
Parasites the lot.
45

JohnBowes,

Glasgow 15/01/2009 08:51:31
I cannot see what these people are doing as "funny". They are just manure. WHY should ANYONE accept the laws that such trash bags spew out? No wonder people are sticking the finger up at the law. Again, who would accept laws that come from such vomit inducing scum?
46

SuperSaint,

15/01/2009 08:53:24
Well done #9!

That's it then, no more elections. Fifi has identified that one political party is 'the winner'.

Let's install that party into power (if they are not already, it's unclear as to who she has actually declared the winner) and end the farce that, clearly, is democratic elections.

Many thanks Fifi you have saved the taxpayer millions in meaningless elections and saved us the worry of decided the best candidate/party on a 4 yearly basis. Phew.

Give me Zimbabwe over a parliamentary democracy anyday.
47

David MacVicar,

web 15/01/2009 08:57:12
And..'la cerise sur le gateau', to really put the art into article, a genuine photo of a one pound coin.
CLASS!
48

FLUB,

a rocky outcrop in eastern central Scotland 15/01/2009 08:58:43
#45 - that is the main point; what incredible arrogance to submit a hotel bill in anticipation it will be paid in full without examination or question. Why aren't we being told the amount of the bill and what was reimbursed for 'hospitality'?
49

,

15/01/2009 09:03:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
50

Jacqueline Hyde ,

On the shelf 15/01/2009 09:10:13
The Scotsman has always been just a bit too keen to "expose" the expenses of politicians. Virtually all the examples in the story are either quite reasonable mistakes or have arisen from a lack of definition as to what does and what doesn't constitute a reimbursable expense. However, it's good to know that our civil servants are so vigilant - even though the scrutiny of hotel bills down to the nearest £1 may seem like nitpicking to some.
51

jdships,

Edinburgh 15/01/2009 09:12:20
Hey guy's are any of you really surprised ?
Politician = beat the system = sleaze = not to be trusted.

It may only be a minor controversy but it is sad , but true, that overall the actions of politicians , of all parties , does not send out good vibes to the public.
These are the people , after all ,we have to trust to build a better life for those to come .

Frightening isn't it !!
52

scottishcoffindodgerno1,

Tram City 15/01/2009 09:21:46
39# know your history,you forgot to mention the RIOTS in Edinburgh that were put down by same people who sold there SOULS for english gold ie:- LORD STAIRS.
There also riots in other places as well when they found out,but to late,the dirty deed was down
53

scottishcoffindodgerno1,

Tram City 15/01/2009 09:26:59
38#So setting the city on fire is only a little unrest,talk about rose tinted specs
54

Ewan Randall,

15/01/2009 09:38:05
Why did this story pass?

Wasn’t the explanation for the pound plausible enough?

Are not charitable donations of this size regularly a part of a number of stores charging policies?
55

David MacVicar,

web 15/01/2009 09:40:09
Grahamski - You really are obsessed. Your acute case of anglophilia is flaring up again, incurable I'm afraid.

Bigotry at football - I am shocked! Could even be material for a Maddox exclusive.

Gr-anglo-ski:"there is simply no way of knowing...wasn't a popular uprising". Complete and utter denial there Graham.
From OxfordDNB _ "With squadrone support, Scottish court politicians were able to face down the threat of violent opposition to the union in Scotland. There had been rioting in Glasgow and Edinburgh in 1706...." lots of other records...not contemporary either.

There was major rioting across Scotland up to, during an after the union - documented since centuries.
The terms of the treaty was broken by the English nobles exactly one year after it was signed when the Scottish privy council was abolished.

FYI Anglophilia : - noun
a strong admiration or enthusiasm for England, its people, and things English. "In some cases," like Grahamski, "anglophilia represents an individual's preference for English culture over their own; the belief that English culture is superior".
56

unbiased,

Erehwon o Elddim 15/01/2009 09:42:59
Grahamski - the "wee lassie" had lived in Gourdon all her life, was interviewed on Scotland Tonight and didn't have a trace of an English accent
57

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 09:51:05
64
You poor wee soul.
58

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 09:51:26
65
And your point is......
59

fair scunnered,

edinburgh 15/01/2009 09:51:44
grahamski claims hes from falkirk,so is he happy that london wants to send radioactive soil(low contamination)to a land fill in falkirk,thus when clusters of cancer sufferers appear in the area ,he will say "its for the good of the union?
to quote oil of scotland.com
"The main problem with the Union is Scotland's representation in Westminster until 2005 there was 72 Scottish MP's until Labour re wrote Scotland's polictical map and reduced Scotland's representation by 13 to 59 MP's. There were a total of 529 MP's representing the English constituencies this has now risen to 533 English MP's.

Therefore if every Scottish MP was against an anti Scottish policy they would be beaten in a ratio of 9 to 1. If the 58 Northern Irish and Welsh MP's sided with English MP's the ratio of the defeat would be 11 to 1.

For this reason alone Political Independence should be a high priority for Scots, the Welsh and the Northern Irish, as the undemocratic powers in Westminster cannot be trusted, as this site aims to prove."
60

Cramondo,

Edinburgh 15/01/2009 09:57:29
This is a bit of a non-story. The headline makes it seem that the person concerned made a claim for reminbursement of £1. The reality is that this was a legitimate claim for hotel expenses and among the items on the hotel bill was a small charitable donation.

Apologies if I don't feel scandalised by this. If I was a reporter I'd feel embarrassed at being expected to turn such trivia into a story.
61

fair scunnered,

edinburgh 15/01/2009 09:58:20
english gold was paid to scots to get the union going

Some of the money was used to hire spies, such as Daniel Defoe; his first reports were of vivid descriptions of violent demonstrations against the Union. "A Scots rabble is the worst of its kind," he reported, "for every Scot in favour there is 99 against". Years later John Clerk of Penicuik, originally a leading Unionist, wrote in his memoirs that,

(Defoe) was a spy among us, but not known as such, otherwise the Mob of Edinburgh would pull him to pieces.
Defoe recalls that he was hired by Robert Harley.

The Treaty was widely unpopular in Scotland: Sir George Lockhart of Carnwath, the only member of the Scottish negotiating team against union, noted that `The whole nation appears against the Union' and even Sir John Clerk of Penicuik, an ardent pro-unionist and Union negotiator, observed that the treaty was `contrary to the inclinations of at least three-fourths of the Kingdom'. Public opinion against the Treaty as it passed through the Scottish Parliament was voiced through petitions from shires, burghs, presbyteries and parishes. The Convention of Royal Burghs also petitioned against the Union and not one petition in favour of an incorporating union was received by Parliament. On the day the treaty was signed, the carilloner in St Giles Cathedral, Edinburgh, rang the bells in the tune Why should I be so sad on my wedding day?[11]There were also massive protests in Edinburgh and several other Scottish burghs on the day it was passed by Parliament[citation needed], as threats of widespread civil unrest resulted in Parliament imposing martial law
62

C U Jimmy,

Mauchline 15/01/2009 10:00:26
They are all past masters at bleeding every penny they can get, with no regards to the tax payers. Should they take an oath that they will uphold the the highest standards of their office? and the penalties could be more severe.
63

Cramondo,

Edinburgh 15/01/2009 10:02:09
Should have added that I am not surprised that in the world weird web, this trivial tale triggers a full-scale debate about the Union.

If that "parcel of rogues" had foreseen that 300 years later a politician would commit this expense-mendacity they would have thought again, and we'd still be an independent nation.

There must a trams angle as well. If the fares hadn't gone up (twice) under the SNP we'd have been able to make some clever comment about this expense being the price of a bus fare. Missed opportunity.
64

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 15/01/2009 10:02:43
I don't think it's down to money grabbing or anything else. It's almost certainly down to not checking what expenses are being claimed before submitting the claim. Of course, being stupid labour, he then lies about being asked by the hotel, etc etc, rather than just coming clean and saying he made a mistake.
65

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 10:09:32
71
Where would your average cybernat be without Wikipedia?
66

fair scunnered,

edinburgh 15/01/2009 10:11:34
The English and Scottish parliaments had evolved along different lines, so contradictions and teething troubles in the merged parliament were frequent. For example, the English doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty in all aspects of national life did not exist in Scotland, and the Scottish Parliament was unicameral, not bicameral. Most of the pre-Union traditions of Westminster continued, while those of Scotland were forgotten or ignored.

Defoe drew upon his Scottish experience to write his Tour thro' the whole Island of Great Britain, published in 1726, where he actually admitted that the increase of trade and population in Scotland, which he had predicted as a consequence of the Union, was "not the case, but rather the contrary."

Andrew Fletcher of Saltoun, a vehement critic of the Union, said in An Account of a Conversation, that Scotland suffered "...the miserable and languishing condition of all places that depend upon a remote seat of government."
67

Dick Lynas,

Glasgow 15/01/2009 10:11:48
A couple of sensible comments Cramondo.

That said, the overall catalogue of dubious claims is a bit depressing.

I can only hope that our politicians are as through at doing their jobs as they seem to be at keeping their expenses records.
68

Ewan Randall,

15/01/2009 10:12:03
(#38) – (fair scunnered) – Were you not aware that revenue and other taxes show on each countries own account?
Were you not also aware that the oil and gas fields off of our own country and a number off of England’s are on another account, making it a virtual country?
Did you that the Barnett formula covers all four countries you are talking about?
Do you know the Barnett formula is used in allocating money to each region to balance out inequalities, and treat people and not countries as equal?
Were you aware there were unionists in Scotland about eighty years before the actual union, as many Scots feared the power of England and felt it would be safer in a union?
You are right about the animosity involved with the act of union, but did you know this animosity stemmed back to the anger generated at the time of the ill fated Darien scheme?
Did you also know that this animosity wasn’t natural but whipped up to gain backing for the Darien scheme, and was also used to divert anger away from those who ran the scheme when things went so very badly wrong?
69

Miss H,

15/01/2009 10:13:50
I agree with 74, he just hasn't checked his hotel bill. Nobody is going to try and defraud the taxpaayer of £1. It doesn't really matter.

The level of scrutinty of expenses is actually a bit silly. The Scotsman has made a fine tradition of 'exposing' MSPs claiming for things like milk and toilet rolls which has always amazed me.

I have never worked in an office where you were expected to bring your own toilet roll into work.
Most places I have worked tea, coffee and milk came out of petty cash.

Plants? Well that's debatable. Obviously individuals bring their own plants in to put on their desks. But a lot of offices will also have plants as part of the decor, in waiting areas for example.

It's all a bit silly really.

70

fair scunnered,

edinburgh 15/01/2009 10:15:15
#75 scotland would be a better place without po faced unionists like yerself,yer coupon must resemble an @rsehole in january,oh speeking of @rseholes lard haw haw foulkes,see hes keeping quiet on this,lest we look more closely into his expenses
71

,

15/01/2009 10:21:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
72

Alan Reid,

NZ 15/01/2009 10:22:38
Rab The Ranter, point is mate when we're independant they're our scum and we can do something about it.
73

brownlie,

15/01/2009 10:25:44
75 Grahamski

Probably in Falkirk.
74

Nikostratos,,

15/01/2009 10:26:33
#79 Miss H

It's all a bit silly really...It's all a bit 'The Scotsman'

#60 Rab The Ranter™

Like my old mama used to say "Scum is as scum does".

And you are your mothers son for sure!
75

JayJay,

Right here 15/01/2009 10:27:42
Grahamski at #39
"Your assertion that England gets a 'lot more' than Scotland doesn't really bear scrutiny either and this false claim only fans the flames of bigotry and resentment."
I am probably unwise to ask, but on what do you base this statement? If you are going to pull out the sort of stats much favoured by that terrible rag the Evening Standard that excludes supposedly "national" costs such as the bulk of the Civil Service, the Olympics, Jubliee Line, St Pancreas and Eurotunnel, M25 extension etc etc then fine, but I am afraid I can only use my own two eyes. Using them, I note that the "M8" is not, and has never been a motorway, and the west coast mainline stops being a modern train service somewhere just outside Birmingham. If the Union cannot even bring itself to finance a sensible road and rail network in the country, having had the last 40 odd years to address our dreadful infrastructure, I am really struggling to see exactly how we benefit from the largesse of London.
The writer was of course wrong. Its not "England" that gets too much, its the South East of England. How now are they going to justify their many advantages when the supposed "engine room of the economy", the City of London, has been exposed as a giant casino?
76

,

15/01/2009 10:32:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
77

Il Penseroso,

Inverurie 15/01/2009 10:34:38
Grahamski #29 Are you happy with your MP who supported the war in Iraq based on lies and duplicity that cost the lives of thousands of women and children and our own troops? You wee Eric Joyce licked the boots of two war criminals (B&B) and did a pretty good job with his own expenses.A few plants seem a DISPROPORTIONATE comparison. Still that is the expected morality of a Westminster New Labour MP;greed, double standards and militant to the core! The Empire is still with him.
78

brownlie,

15/01/2009 10:40:34
87 Union is Best

The same place as we dug up the voters who, although they had passed away, voted against the interests of Scotland with a bit of help from us.
79

Westfield Bairns,

falkirk 15/01/2009 10:43:55
68
Grahamski aint from Falkirk and he obviously attended the School of bad history when he was a young Troll.

The Union was acheived through fear and bribery and the Scottish people have never VOTED for any Union FACT. The Union at present is maintained by the above tactics aswell
80

brownlie,

15/01/2009 10:45:12
88 Il Penseroso

Quite an appropriate moniker for the state of the country. "Hail divinest Melacholy"!
81

brownlie,

15/01/2009 10:48:04
91 Union is Best

Our Mandy did not get where he is today by not knowing about the skeletons in the cup-board.
82

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 10:50:11
90
Oh dear, another nat who opted for modern studies and got their history from notorious anti-semite, Mr Melvin Gibson.
83

brownlie,

15/01/2009 10:50:52
90 Westfield Bairn

We unionists did not get where we are today by taking any notice of history. The economics of how to exist on a subsistence wage as MP/MSPs is the only subject we are interested in until just before an election.
84

brownlie,

15/01/2009 10:54:43
97 Union is Best

Why are we reduced to having Grahamski defending our cause?
85

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 10:56:37
86
Isn't there a wee English lassie you could be slapping? Go on ya big patriot , ye!
86

brownlie,

15/01/2009 10:58:40
99 Grahamski

Our unionists abhor violence, except against innocent Iraqis, so please desist from encouraging violence!
87

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 10:59:05
98
John,
Reduced to deception to defend your cause, are you? What a pity it is that you have to rely on lies to further the case for independence, still, not exactly alone in doing that are yo, Jo-Jo?
88

brownlie,

15/01/2009 11:01:28
101 Grahamski

Unionists - deception is what we do best!!
89

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 11:03:31
102
Johnny-boy,
Don't be a silly wee nat now. I know it's embarrassing having all your policies exposed as hoaxes but be a man and stand up for what you really believe in. Lying is for losers......and nats apparently
90

brownlie,

15/01/2009 11:09:19
103 Grahamski

Best not to mention hoaxes in case the Nats mention "weapons of mass destruction" "45 minutes warning" "no boom and bust" or "I saved the world" which were not really policies just prime examples of terminological inexactitudes designed to deceive.

Please do not be sexist by using the expression "Be a man"!!
91

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 15/01/2009 11:10:24
It had to be a Labour member. Their greed and self-interest knows no bounds.

That reminds me, how is the investigation into David Marshall's misuse of public money progressing? Anyone know?

92

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 11:11:34
Every time you turn our elected representatives are claiming for travel, claiming for accomodation, Stationary office space the list goes on and on.

At a time when both the public and private sector and families alike are haveing to cut back our elected guardians carry on with there state sponsored Lifestyles regardless these people make dictatorships seem attractive.
93

Cramondo,

Edinburgh 15/01/2009 11:18:41
#86 Going by your intemperate language, I wouldn't like to have your people like you in power in a million years, but fear that perhaps, in Scotland, they are.

How on earth could a body representing the whole Scottish nation have made such a decision, given that the old Parliament did not have universal suffrage (something eventually achieved under the union)?

As for the date on which the Scottish People chose to be part of the union, there are many dates in existence, such as EVERY General Election since we had universal suffrage in the UK. If you examine these votes carefully, you will see that the combined votes for the unionist parties always vastly outnumber those for the nationalist parties.

Any pretence that the modern-day Scottish people have never had a chance to choose independence is nonsense.

The Scottish people vote for the union every time. You might not like that, but it is our choice.

I predict that this state of affairs will continue throughout my lifetime, even under a future Cameron government.

Now, go and try to persuade people rather than berate them.
94

brownlie,

15/01/2009 11:26:06
108 Cramondo

Very good post. Only one problem that I can see from it and that is your claim that the Scottish people vote for the union every time. They may vote for unionist parties but the modern-day Scottish People were not given the stark choice of staying in the union or independence
95

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 11:27:01
Cramondo There is a simple equation here;

Conservative Goverment in Westminster;

UK wide implosian of Labour severe infighting with the loony left comeing out on top makeing Labour un electable leading to SNP strong Majority in Holyrood

= Independance
96

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 11:37:26
110
Again we see the nats looking forward to a tory government to suit their narrow and cynical aims. The last time they sold their fellowe Scots out and caused a tory government they were all but wiped out. Have the nutty nats learned nothing?
Puzzling to see a patriot like Thistledhu struggling with spelling the word independence, eh?
97

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 11:39:08
Grahamski,im not a nationlist
98

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 11:39:56
Grahamski, if you wish to get involved in interparty mudslinging on you go but please pick the right people
99

awantapassport,

doonsooth 15/01/2009 11:39:57
103 Grahamski

What a sad little muppet you are. You appear to revel in the fact that a poor girl was attacked by a moron, using it to your own anti Scottish political ends.

I feel sorry for you - you really must be a bitter individual... be careful, all that bile may give you ulcers.
100

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 11:41:42
Grahamski, independence happy?
101

Observer,,

Glasgow 15/01/2009 11:47:44
Grahamski you have lost it; using a wee lassie getting punched in the face as a political weapon in your armoury is beyond the pale. And has been clearly established the biggest vicitims of racial crime in this country are Asians - you are strangely silent on that one.

This story is just made-up nonsense. At least Scottish MSP's have to make claims for individual items of expenditure, and they can be knocked back. What a difference from Westminster, it's like night and day. That is what the article should have pointed out, but that would require a journalist to write it.
102

Observer,,

Glasgow 15/01/2009 11:51:18
113 If a Tory government get in, it won't be Scots who vote for them. Just like the last time. Do you suggest we just linger about for a couple of terms sending another useless feeble fifty down to Westminster and wait for the new Poll Tax to arrive. Not on your life.
103

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 11:51:47
my point or rather prediction in 110 although off subject is that due to the poor quality of politician in scotland due to years of stagnation any party that is seen to have momentum in scotland and that offers a viable oppisition to a tory goverment and its exces's will be very attractive to most scots.

104

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 11:53:56
viable oppisition is not petty point scoreing and politicaly motiveted strikes i might add
105

Observer,,

Glasgow 15/01/2009 11:54:31
9 Fifi -was that a party political broadcast from the ''let's abolish democracy'' party then ?
106

Cramondo,

Edinburgh 15/01/2009 11:55:06
#109 Fair enough, but even when they had a choice of voting for pro or anti referendum parties, most voted for the antis.

Equally, given numerous elections where they could have voted for a pro-independence party, the majority didn't.

I'm happy to engage with the reasonable nats who believe in the virtues of living in a small country etc. But those that rant on about the injustices perpetrated 300 years ago need to get a life and give us peace.

I'm happy to bet that most of them live in the kind of luxury, and enjoy much better health, nutrition and personal safety than anyone would have had 300 years ago. Yet they're happy to play the "we're all victims of oppression" card for evermore.

If the union was SO oppressive, the Scottish people should, could and would have voted themselves out of it by now and we haven't. Liberal democracy has its faults but is better than any other system available.

#110 We'll see, although I don't think your prediction about Labour's leftward lurch is a likely scenario.
107

Il Penseroso,

Inverurie 15/01/2009 11:55:33
Grahamski I'm still waiting for a reply from you at #88
108

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 12:02:45
Cramondo I disagree a tory goverment will have the unions remaining power base well in its sights

The unions will provide political and financial backing to those they think will provide the most oppositon to such moves that is the left.

Add to that historicly every time Labour has lost power there has been a leftward move as the moderates are held to account for the partys failure in goverment.
109

David MacVicar,

web 15/01/2009 12:17:45
108 Cramondo, imo its a fair post but a crass argument.

Clearly in a UK election people are voting on parties, polices and the subjects debated upon based on the info easily available to the public.

At any time since the 50s when the population has actually been asked to express a preference on the constitution the response has 100% been to express a desire to seize power back from Westminster in one form or another.

The 1979 referendum received a clear YES majority of the vote by any democratic accepted norm. Except in Britain. Any other democratic examples where the majority vote in a referendum loses (Zimbabwe doesn't count)?

An full Independence referendum has not occurred and the subject has never had full and open debate. Financial debates here are important for many but this is completely obfuscated by those holding the keys. Any evidence that does surface consistently shows Westminster to have mislead the UK public over Scottish Economics + over a period of time eg. McCrone. This can quite justifiably be termed as an orchestrated policy of deception.

Now if someone thinks that the Union should continue at any cost (like Brown) then this would seem fair game. However anyone who thinks the Union should continue through mutual agreement based on open debate and mutual respect, this process is anathema.
110

ecosseman,

facts no propaganda 15/01/2009 12:28:34
penny caramel stories again.what about the £1BILLION COST ON THE WHITE ELEPHANT LONDON DOME,and labour/lib £500million holyrood.FACT-SNP DID NOT WANT THIS BUILDING!
111

Luigiana,

Aberdeen 15/01/2009 12:38:56
So what's the story?

A group of pigs in a feeding frenzy will attack anything in the trough, no matter how large or small.
112

Calum Crubag,

Alba 15/01/2009 12:39:59
Labour must be getting desparate. A £1 charity donation.

As to the Taxpayers' Alliance - they're a bunch of Tory ex-private schoolboys. Probably to extreme even for the Tory and Labour parties. I'm a taxpayer too and they don't represent me.
113

Calum Crubag,

15/01/2009 12:44:32
113 - Grahamski.

We've got a Tory govt just now. George Bush, a right-wing nutter Christian, is/was one of Labour's biggest friends. It's Labour who are bringing in ID Cards and who want a private business to keep records of all our texts and emails. It's Labour who are gonna privatise the Royal Mail. Some of this is even too far-right for the official Tory party!

When it comes to Nats - i don't like the look of the BritNats much: BNP, Labour, Tory, Orange Order, Mosely. What a shower...
114

TWC,

15/01/2009 12:48:16
MP/MSP expenses are a disgrace but the penny claim is obviously an oversight by the Labour MP.
Far more attention should have been paid to Lord Foulkes andthe guy who retired from Glasgow East to examine claims against them.
Remember 4 unreceipted lunches = £100 at Westminster

Old age pension for everything = £96 for a week

Time for a real revolt by socialist MPs in view of the financial problems of everybody else
115

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 12:52:30
132 Time for a real revolt by socialist MPs in view of the financial problems of everybody else.

Do dream on there too busy on union financed junkets for such Trivia
116

Miss H,

15/01/2009 13:02:10
132 In what sense are MSPs expenses a disgrace?

They are lower than any other parliamentarians in Europe and every single item claimed is published down to the last penny.

So I don't really get your point.
117

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 13:08:29
124
I try not to indulge infantile ranters. If you care to grow up a bit and ask a reasonable question I'd be delighted to answer you. In the meantime you can carry on howling at the moon.
118

Miss H,

15/01/2009 13:10:31
106 'Every time you turn our elected representatives are claiming for travel, claiming for accomodation, Stationary office space the list goes on and on.'

And your point is?

How the devil do you expect people to do a job without stationery - how are they supposed to write letters and communicate with people?

As for travel and accomodation - it's part of their job. Parliament is in Edinburgh, their constituencies are not (unless they are Edinburgh MSPs of course in which case they get no travel and accomodation allowances).

The logic of your argument suggests that we should have no kind of democratic representation at all because it costs money to run it.

Well that has been tried not altogether successfully.
119

Cramondo,

Edinburgh 15/01/2009 13:18:46
#127 Crass, how so?

I was merely pointing out that, in opposition to the "parcel of rogues" type of argument that frequently resurfaces here, we have had party democracy and universal suffrage for some time. The fact that the union persists results largely from how people have voted.

That's a fairly simple argument though not, I would submit, simplistic, and certainly not "crass". Though on the nationalists' scale of abuse (numpty, liar, quisling, traitor, nazi as in Lord Haw-Haw) "crass" is mild, so I thank you for your relative moderateness.

I agree with you about the seventies referendum but that was then and this is now.

The fact is that, in a referendum, we voted for devolution and we have it.

You are perfectly entitled to argue for independence. So far, that case has not prevailed. That's all, really.
120

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 13:23:38
131
I agree with and am pleasantly surprised by your aversion to nationalists of any hue. The seeds of tyranny are buried in every nationalist movement.
121

Miss H,

15/01/2009 13:27:56
137 By applying your logic we could assume that if the SNP won 51% of the vote at an election (even on a low turnout) we could declare independence.

It is really not as simple as that.

Independence is something which actually lies beyond party politics. There are people who vote SNP who do not support independence. There are people (quite a lot of them) who vote Labour who do support independence.

People vote for a multitude of reasons at elections - and they are generally focused on what institution they are electing an individual to. Because that's what elections are - choosing individuals to represent you in a democratic body of some sort.

They are not referendums on independence or the union - which is why the only way to resolve constitutional matters is through a referendum. The Scottish Parliament has its mandate directly from the people who voted for it in a referendum. It doesn't get its mandate from the fact that Labour won an election. Likewise there will be a mandate for independence when people vote for it directly - not if they vote for the SNP at an election.
122

Observer,,

Glasgow 15/01/2009 13:28:04
138 The seeds of tyranny are not buried in every nationalist movement, otherwise every country in the world would be a tyranny.
123

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 13:39:39
139
The Scottish people had and have a democratic method of seperating from the UK. They simply vote for a party which advocates this policy. In the century or so since universal suffrage the people of Scotland have not done this.
Have the minority SNP administration got a mandate in Holyrood for a referendum on seperation do you think?
124

Nelbert,

15/01/2009 13:41:02
forget this non story about a £1 the real story of the day is here

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7829279.stm

125

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 13:41:28
140
Poor wee Observer going off the rails. Please don't fall into the typical nat trap of assuming just because you're a nationalist then everybody is.
126

Miss H,

15/01/2009 13:42:10
138 The seeds of tyranny are in fact buried in opposition to democracy and the rule of law.

Whenever I read one of your posts Grahamski I have a mental image of Gene Wilder. I think it is that scene in the Producers where he is going 'I'm hysterical! I'm hysterical! I'm in pain and I'm hysterical! I'm wet and I'm in pain and I'm hysterical!'

127

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 13:42:31
142
Thanks for telling us what's important....
128

Grahamski,

Falkirk 15/01/2009 13:44:28
144
Och don't be daft, I've got my blanket right here.....
129

bill-alba,

fife 15/01/2009 13:47:20
Grahamski...why dont you support independence, when Scotland is independent you could live in England for a couple of years and then go through one of the wonderfull citizenship ceromonies and become English as that it what you a appear to want..as a wannabie english person.
130

Miss H,

15/01/2009 13:48:26
146 Funnily enough I see Alex Salmond playing Max Bialystock.

Don't have nightmares now.
131

Gala Growler,

GALASHIELS 15/01/2009 13:48:50
Just typical of these snout in the trough freeloaders. Of course a lot of them come from a local council background where these rackets are rife. It's about time they came into the real world where people have to pay their way and not be thinking all the time about how next they can fleece us all.
132

Observer,,

Glasgow 15/01/2009 13:49:22
143 Whit ? This is not one of your good days for posting. Mind you neither was yesterday. Or indeed the day before.
133

,

15/01/2009 13:50:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
134

David MacVicar,

web 15/01/2009 14:00:36
137 Cramondo 'Crass' how so?

Well I did try to explain what aspect I felt was a crass argument in your post using concrete examples. Checking up a definition it does state: Crass 'without refinement, obtuse' from dictionery.com
It was the rather sweeping statement that a GE result represents public opinion on independence (which was without refinement and obtuse ie. crass.

At the end of the day though, it is indeed in our own hands certainly. Nothing really has changed since 1979. At least the National conversation was an SNP policy prior to the election open to all. The LAB/tory gentlemans club to do there own thing, representing the UK, 90% of people who live outside Scotland is well and truly anti democratic on Scottish constitutional issues. Unionists tend to forget that any voice with an interest in independence has been completely excluded from that process, SNP, Greens, socialists, general public. A significant percentage of the country whose voice is being excluded.

The general opinion of unionist poloiticians is that:
a) Fiscal control will result independence for Scotland. Guess its not a disaster then.
b) Debate about independence, followed by a referendum is somehow considered as enabling 'independence by the back door'? Whats the front door then?

a+b = a unionist position in conflict with our own democratic interests. As I said nothing has changed since 1979.
135

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 14:03:48

135 miss H my pointi s being a mp/msp is not an excuse to print money

When i go to work it is at my expense
when i read a paper it is at my expense

at my work i have admin asistants provided for me provided to help me if i need extra staff say for example a family member id have to pay for that myself
i travel 30 miles to my place of work i do not book myself into an expensive hotel and expect the tax payer to pay for it.

The amount of money claimed by MP'S and MSP'S is unjustifiableand immoral
136

Cramondo,

Edinburgh 15/01/2009 14:15:53
#139 Yes, I agree that constitutional change would have to follow a referendum.

The first step towards having such a referendum would be to elect a parliamentary majority in favour of having it.

While we're arguably closer to that now than we have ever been, we're not there yet, and we might never be.

#152 Yes, it's in the nature of party government that you cannot deduce that everyone who votes for a party is voting for all of its policies. My point was that if the union is such a terrible thing, people could and would have voted it away.

By your definition of "crass", nothing I wrote is as crass as your view that "nothing really has changed since 1979".

An SNP minority administration, a parliament voted on by proportional representation, local councils voted by STV, the list goes on; these amount to "nothing"?

Thanks for your replies to my posts. Must get off line now.


137

Observer,,

Glasgow 15/01/2009 14:23:51
153 Do you have to pay for your own travelling costs when travelling for business reasons ? Do you have to provide your own toilet paper ? If you have to stay in a Hotel overnight when on a business trip do you need to pay for it yourself ? If you do then I suggest that your employer is taking a loan of you, perhaps you should join a trade-union.

If you don't then you are in much the same position as the average MSP.
138

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 14:24:35
155 Peter Evidence of that?
139

David MacVicar,

web 15/01/2009 14:32:54
154 Cramondo, maybe you will read my reply later....

'Nothing has changed' was referring to unionist politicians circumventing democracy by any means possible, especially using Westminster interest, again with example. I did not mean that nothing whatsoever has changed. Seamed obvious in the context of the post, however I shall try to be more clear in future.
140

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 14:33:42
156 traveling to and fro from place of work to your home is not claimable by anyone other than politiceons,

Most MSP,S live within commuteing distance of edinburgh so why the accomadation expenses
the constituency office rent swindle
Taxi fares when the journey is walkable or you could get a bus.
What employer pays for inumerable lunches

And the last time i checked no one is charged for use of toilet paper in the scotish parliment so why the claims for it
141

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 14:37:27
Observer,, and re being a member of a union i am though apart from recogniseing my cowardice in bowing down to this protection racket i gain very little from it
142

Stan Butler,

15/01/2009 14:41:56

There isn't going to be a referendum. The gnats won't want to hold one unless they're sure of winning it. They'll find an excuse not to have it. Wait and see.
143

Observer,,

Glasgow 15/01/2009 14:42:29
159 MSP's are not based in Holyrood all the time. They have constituency Offices and staff. The expenses they claim (other than housing allowances which I think are too generous, I'd build a hostel type building for them to stay in) are either for running these Offices, or are the equivalent of expenses which most other businesspeople or employees receive as well. It's one of the most scrutinised and efficiently administered expenses systems in the Europe and also one of the cheapest. It's not comparable to the Westminster trough so to say MP's/MSP's as if they are inter-changeable as you did, is inaccurate.

If we didn't fund our politicians to provide the service their constituents expect, politics would be a rich man's game. I don't think we want that.
144

Observer,,

Glasgow 15/01/2009 14:44:26
160 I put that in as a wee joke. I don't think they are ''protection rackets'' as you call them, but you're entitled to your opinion.
145

Il Penseroso,

Inverurie 15/01/2009 14:44:59
#135 Grahamski So a straight forward question about your MP is "an infantile rant and unreasonable". Cowardice and frightened of the truth on your part! Like the huge majority of opinions expressed here you are a sad wee man! The SMS sticks out a mile (small man syndrome). Bet you are glad we have an NHS that looks after your illness for free!
146

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 14:50:05
funding yes i agree scams no

constituancy offices and staff is back door local party funding if iwant to donate to a party i will do so i do not expect my taxes to be used to fund local party's

Ive pointd this out before but in case you are unaware the office scam i refer to is this

local party leases out office space at the going rate
local party then rents out this office to their msp at a higher rate pocketing the diffrence the MSP of course claims the rent from you and me.

147

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 14:51:24
163 an opinion came about due to hard bitter exprience
148

Observer,,

Glasgow 15/01/2009 14:54:46
165 Anything like that should be closed down. I know some MP's/MSP's share Offices, perhaps that is how they do it. No tax payers money should go to the local party, you are quite right.
149

Billiam Wallace,

15/01/2009 14:55:01
Further to #164;
#135 Grahamski, I can't see where Il Penseroso's question is childish and an unbearable rant. I do however understand your reluctance to give him a straight answer as it would mean admitting that you support a lickspittle MP who backs an illegal war and who fawns on those two traitors, Broon Troosers and Bliar. As for the argument that Scots have had a hundred years to vote for independence and not done so, I think that this argument is disingenuous as it is only recently that the public were informed enough to make a more balanced judgement on what was good for them, (the people of Grangemouth still failed to spot the better path, with a little help from Voteriggers Anonymous). Remember that the unionist parties have always had control of the media and they ensured that the electorate would be swayed towards their parties and would reject nationalists as too radical and dangerous when the opposite is true. The recent awakening of the Scottish people to the realisation that they don't have to be under the heel of Westmonster and don't have to be run from far away by people with no interest in their welfare, has been a seachange in how we perceive ourselves and of how we can aspire to better ourselves and our nation for us and for future generations. The fact that our German royal family has given orders to derail any break up of the union only increases the need to see the independence movement succeed. The fact that you ignore all the many faults of NuLiebour and the union only makes you appear less and confirms that you are either a paid lacky or indeed a NuLiebour politician or activist.

Saor Alba and Goodbye UK
150

Observer,,

Glasgow 15/01/2009 14:56:23
166 We could share TU battle stories another time, but I still say don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, you're as well being in as out.
151

Rufus-T-Firefly,

15/01/2009 14:56:39
Carrots were first grown in the colour orange as a tribute to king william of orange.

I hope SNP MSP Michael Matheson does not hear about this or the SNP will ban them.

http://www.bbcgoodfood.com/content/k...ossary/carrot/
152

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 14:58:01
167 sadly it is commen practice by all partys
153

Thistledhu,

15/01/2009 15:06:43
169 a debate for another day but unions are in dire need of root and branch reform.
154

Lord F,

the land of no political or religious belief 15/01/2009 15:50:52
Another example of greed from politicians of all natures, only in it for themselves and what they can get out of it, you only ever see them when they're lookin for your vote,

Gone are the days when your local councillor got his bus fair for going in to the toon to try and get you a hoose or your local fitba pitch mowed,
its awe junkets and jollies noo
155

Miss H,

15/01/2009 16:14:43
153 You really are talking nonsense you know. Do you think MSPs order every local newspaper for fun? It is part of their work, just as travelling in their constituency and between their constituency and parliament is part of their work.

It’s a complete nonsense to say that they should pay to travel to work like ‘everyone else’. Everyone else does not have two workplaces – the constituency and the parliament. People who are required to travel as part of their job receive an allowance to cover the cost of that, just as MSPs do.

If you choose to live 30 miles away from your place of work that's your choice. If you are the MSP for Inverness however you don't choose to have your constituency office in Inverness and go to the parliament in Edinburgh - you have no choice about that.

If you don’t want MSPs to have travel allowances then we will just have to elect 2 MSPs each instead of 1 – one to be based permanently in the constituency and one to be based permanently in parliament. Which would be pretty stupid, don’t you think?

What really saddens me about this kind of story is that it is all a part of the agenda to encourage the kind of self-loathing and negativity which holds Scotland back. I don't think any other country in Europe has such a down their elected members quite as much as we do. And we elect them so what does that say about us?
156

Miss H,

15/01/2009 16:20:33
165 and 167 All of this expenditure is published and can be inspected by anyone.

So tell us all who is doing it and where?
157

radge dug,

15/01/2009 16:39:52
Grahamski - I agree. All nationalist movements ARE inherently tyrannical. Apart from the British model which has enlightened and liberated people all over the world - the Aboriginal Australians, Maoris, native Americans, the Irish, Africans.

Nelson Mandela as a black nationalist is an evil man. As were the Sandinistas when they resisted US-supported fascists. As are the Irish - for maintaining their 'evil' independence of London. As are the tyrants of Norway who flout decency by maintaining independence from Copenhagen. The Norwegians i know really are a hate-filled bunch. And how dare those blecks want indepence from the Brit Empire.

Are you a socialist btw?
158

radge dug,

15/01/2009 16:41:52
Was good to see Tony Blair and George W join forces in a new Socialist International and free the people of Iraq and Afghanistan. The Kurds of Iraq are now free but the Kurds of Turkey are terrorists. Simple.
159

radge dug,

15/01/2009 16:43:27
Similarly. Jewish Semites from Israel are peaceful and law-abiding with their nuclear-armed state, but the Christian and Muslim Semites of the same region are terrorists as they don't have a state and army any more.

Forward with Blairite Socialism!
160

Libertarian!,

15/01/2009 16:46:52
This person is a typical example of the worst quality of politician to infest the UK ever since the Union of the Parliaments. They are the law makers but don't particular adhere to it themselves. These are the very same people who have driven the country to near bankruptcy and financial ruin and have committed the generations to come to bear the burden with no choice.
When they commit a felony no matter the seriousness and are caught out, they either made a mistake, or didn't realise or misunderstood. They are not long in understanding how to make themselves very rich at the expense of the ordinary people and it's these same people especially here and in the USA, who are directly responsible for the financial mayhem that is now engulfing planet earth. They are merely nothing less than'legalised crooks'.
Will we evr learn? I doubt it!

161

Ju@nkerr.,

15/01/2009 16:57:07
187 - but he remains silent on Jim Smurphies support of the IRA when they were bombing with abandon.

Meanwhile , in the early hours , lupus t erk hole , Cycels through all his monickers to make his position look as if it is supported! LOL jcheevers , gb 007, wigstaff von irksome etc

Fifi la bing boing is her usual denialist self. Have LAbour learned nothing from their dishonesty! some times it is better to say nothing than try to excuse it!
162

Ju@nkerr.,

15/01/2009 17:01:13
186 - peston is just a mouth piece for labour. He gets his info from his dad during parliamentary meeting he is broadcasting live on banks collapse"

The BBC is no longer fit for purpose. A modrn day pravda. Murphy will like that. As long as they start broadcasting IRA propganda. I wonder how AM2 is feeling about his "muse" now! LOL straight into a door!
163

Faux Cul,

15/01/2009 17:51:06
#184 et al
Peter,
Same old same old Unionist claptrap 15/01/2009 16:45:39

Here's another wee bit o' tittle tattle.

Lard Mandelson is getting a wee bit of stick for The Evening Standard regarding his £2.5 million house and how he bought it.

There is a question about an apparent shortfall in the lucre Mandelson had available and not for the first time for the then Mr Mandelson regarding another property.

Interestingly Mr Mandy was a director of an advertising agency called Clenmow Hornby Inge Ltd.

Recognise a name there?

Hornby? Not the MD at HBOS, but his brother, allegedly?
164

TWC,

15/01/2009 18:18:42
Grahamski, Smee and Rufus have been absolutely tortured today because with a wee play on "Rab the Ranter" New Labour are the Worserest Party on every topic but especially sleaze.
The Nats and the rest of us at least admit that Sleaze is always there it's just worse with Labour.
165

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 15/01/2009 19:02:19
Can't see this article as anything other than a space filler.


The real story lies in the fact that that certain organisations add a £1 charity levy. Who on earth gave them the right to use underhand tactics and emotional blackmail.

Real story, please. Who are these companies?
166

,

15/01/2009 19:21:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
167

Jimmy Le Pie,

15/01/2009 20:09:15
#198 Col.

Good post.

Sainsbury is the right man to start printing billions of new banknotes when the government begin their "quantative easing" programme, in a desperate attempt to end Comrade Broon's recession.

Banks do have a tradition of appointing grocers. I'm sure that clown that presided over the collapse of HBOS, Andy Hornby, was a grocer/butcher.
168

Faux Cul,

15/01/2009 20:37:02
Clenmow Hornby Inge, set up by Johnny Hornby, brother to Andy Hornby of HBOS fame!!

A Hornby recruited by Crosby to HBOS and succeded him.

J Crosby special adviser to G Brown esq. and director of FSA.

All allegedly.
169

Faux Cul,

15/01/2009 20:39:44
The boys are back in town.

Which town?

Boystown?

Allegedly
170

Faux Cul,

15/01/2009 20:40:47
Where does Brown fit in, to all this?
171

Faux Cul,

15/01/2009 20:42:01
Any connection between Sainsbury's and
172

Observer,,

Glasgow 15/01/2009 20:46:51
202 Follow the money Faux - Brown doesn't seem to be that into it. Not like Blair and Mandleson. There are no financial scandals or skullduggery associated with Brown, yet we are tripping over them with the Blair/Mandleson team. He seems to have rolled over and allowed the ''filthy rich'' Mandy is so intensely relaxed about to play monopoly with our collective capital without personally enriching himself in the process. He really is sectionable. Allegedly.
173

Faux Cul,

15/01/2009 20:48:49
et voila,


calls unnecessary
174

Faux Cul,

15/01/2009 20:51:37
204
Observer,,


read your mails!
175

Observer,,

Glasgow 15/01/2009 20:53:22
205 Just got your message, timing or what ? Aye Brown is a weirdo he seems to have sold his socialist soul for - nothing.
176

Faux Cul,

15/01/2009 21:07:19
He sold for ego, for power, for position

He is really dangerous and needs to be sectioned or.......................
177

Observer,,

Glasgow 15/01/2009 21:16:05
Dealt with ? We are humane, let's go for sectioning him ! But soon , before those printing presses really start going.

anyway I'm off, bye for now.
178

Faux Cul,

15/01/2009 21:18:21
nighty
179

Euan McEwan,

15/01/2009 22:40:57
#195. It seems to me that these people to whom you have referred must be part of the Scotsman team and sanctioned by the editor Gilson. How else can they post before the edition hits the wires?

Surely if Gilson has a brain in his head he can see the damage being done to this forum and The Scotsman, it is quite simply a disgrace to see this once great paper being deliberately driven into the muck.

The only other thing I can imagine is that these agent provocateurs are employed by some other agency, John Smith House perhaps, to troll around the forums day and night. It surely is different people using the same log ins as no one can keep up the kind of vigilance that seems to be required of each moniker.

It does flag up the paranoia and fear amongst the Labour fraternity that the SNP are really starting to show how much better Scotland can be run under their excellent stewardship of Holyrood. Mind you that was not a difficult task given the buffoonery that took place under the last administration.

Independence is inevitable.
180

,

15/01/2009 23:33:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.